Message214755
| Author |
skrah |
| Recipients |
Arfrever, BreamoreBoy, benjamin.peterson, georg.brandl, larry, loewis, mark.dickinson, pitrou, schwab, skrah, tim.peters |
| Date |
2014年03月24日.23:05:51 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<20140324230550.GA24828@sleipnir.bytereef.org> |
| In-reply-to |
<1395694481.66.0.197880898179.issue20904@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
Benjamin Peterson <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> I don't want to scare away contributors.
I think this is a very important point. Initially I was skeptical about m68k,
too (msg182388), but I've completely changed my opinion due to the nature
of the patches.
So far, the m68k issues were about C-standard compliance and timing assumptions
in tests.
This one is a small patch that won't affect anything else.
My experience with exotic Linux ports (Debian SPARC, etc.) is that the Python
test suite works rather well out of the box. So I don't expect to have a flood
of posixmodule.c patches or similar (perhaps Andreas can confirm that). |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2014年03月24日 23:05:51 | skrah | set | recipients:
+ skrah, tim.peters, loewis, georg.brandl, mark.dickinson, pitrou, larry, benjamin.peterson, Arfrever, BreamoreBoy, schwab |
| 2014年03月24日 23:05:51 | skrah | link | issue20904 messages |
| 2014年03月24日 23:05:51 | skrah | create |
|